In Casey N. v. County of Orange, published December 23, 2022, the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division 3, affirmed a jury verdict against the defendant county and two social workers in a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit brought by a parent. Social workers investigated allegations that the plaintiff's minor daughter was sexually abused by her father, who was divorced from the mother. One social worker stated in her report her opinion that the mother was emotionally abusing the daughter, and was feeding information or coaching information to the child as part of a family law dispute. The second social worker, who replaced the first, filed a report stating she was unsure whether sexual abuse had taken place, but also recommended the petition allege emotional abuse by the mother. The deputy county counsel dismissed the sexual abuse allegations before the dependency court, and replaced them with allegations of emotional damage or endangerment based on allegations the mother had influenced the child to make false sexual abuse claims. The dependency court found the mother had knowingly caused the minor to make false allegations against the father. The court granted the agency's request that the minor be removed from the mother and given to the father. The mother signed a stipulation giving sole legal and physical custody of the minor to the father with visitation by the mother. She later asserted she had been bullied into signing the stipulation under threat of having her parental rights terminated. The mother sued the social workers and the county for violating her right to familial association by deceiving the juvenile court into removing the minor from her custody. The jury found the social workers liable, found the county liable under a Monell theory, and awarded punitive damages against the social workers.
The appellate court ruled that the issue of the materiality of the social workers' statements--whether, but for the dishonest or misleading statements, the challenged action would not have occurred. In a section 1983 case based on judicial deception, the court decides materiality in a summary judgment proceeding, but the jury determines it at trial. The court further ruled that substantial evidence supported the verdict against the social workers. There was medical and other evidence of sexual abuse that the mother's dependency court counsel did not present, because the sexual assault accusation was dismissed and the evidence would have been irrelevant. The mother also testified she was prevented from offering the evidence at the disposition hearing because she was coerced into signing the stipulation. The court ruled that the social workers were not entitled to qualified immunity. The jury's finding that the social workers had acted with malice, oppression, or in reckless disregard of the mother's rights established that their conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Further, federal case law holds that the doctrine of qualified immunity merges with the merits in a case alleging judicial deception in the procurement of a search warrant. The court declined to rule whether this holding applied here. Substantial evidence also supported the Monell liability finding against the county, based on an official policy or custom of using false or misleading evidence, or in failing to disclose exculpatory evidence, in reports, documents, and testimony to the juvenile court, as well as a failure to properly train social workers.
Comments